Attention Skydivers: Jumping a BASE rig from aircraft in the US is not just illegal, but stupid

[nwt 131]

1 minute ago, 20kN said:

It's a legal assumption, which is a real thing. When the FAA states what an approved parachute system is, then legally anything else is assumed as unapproved if it doesent meet the definition. Rather than saying what is not approved, it's a shorter list to just say what is.

Right, but they also could have said "parachute system" instead of "single harness dual container parachute system" if they wanted to. Seems weird to assume they used all those extra words because they didn't mean them.

[sfzombie13 307]

1 minute ago, nwt said:

Right, but they also could have said "parachute system" instead of "single harness dual container parachute system" if they wanted to. Seems weird to assume they used all those extra words because they didn't mean them.

have you ever read a government document?  they could make it in english, but they choose legalese.

[20kN 93]

1 minute ago, nwt said:

Right, but they also could have said "parachute system" instead of "single harness dual container parachute system" if they wanted to. Seems weird to assume they used all those extra words because they didn't mean them.

Who knows. The only way to know 100% is to test it in court. However, unless you can afford an absurdly expensive lawyer I think the judge would be more likely to side with the FAA. It's not a strong argument that you present.

[nwt 131]

4 minutes ago, sfzombie13 said:

that is why i mentioned 91.307 b.  that part says you can only use an approved parachute for intentional jumps, and that it has to also meet the restrictions in part 105. 

Ooooooohhhhhhh

I get it now. Finally. Thanks for playing :)

[SethInMI 145]

16 minutes ago, sfzombie13 said:

that is why i mentioned 91.307 b.  that part says you can only use an approved parachute for intentional jumps, and that it has to also meet the restrictions in part 105

and i guess with what 20kn said it makes sense:

"105.41 Applicability.
This subpart prescribed rules governing parachute equipment used in civil parachute operations."  

So 20kn is saying the rule is if your equipment isn't described in the following section, you can't use it. But without that important bit, 91.307b doesn't mean you can't use a single parachute system.

[nwt 131]

3 minutes ago, SethInMI said:

and i guess with what 20kn said it makes sense:

"105.41 Applicability.
This subpart prescribed rules governing parachute equipment used in civil parachute operations."  

So 20kn is saying the rule is if your equipment isn't described in the following section, you can't use it. But without that important bit, 91.307b doesn't mean you can't use a single parachute system.

Yup. It all makes sense now.

[mark 102]

I agree with nwt.  Before the 2001 rule change, the regulation was unambiguous -- skydivers were required to use single-harness, dual-parachute systems.  Because of poor drafting, the 2001 change addressed only what a single-harness, dual-parachute system consisted of, to distinguish it from a tandem system, instead of requiring its use.

But it doesn't matter.  It's been litigated, and the commonly-held (pre-2001) position prevailed against us barracks-lawyer types (or sea-lawyers, if you prefer).  The incident was Dwain Weston, Royal Gorge Bridge, 5 October 2003.

[BMAC615 205]

Since we’re on the topic of BASE from aircraft: Does USPA BSR 2-1 A.1. cover ALL jumps - even those made outside the US?

The Basic Safety Requirements apply to all jumps except those made under military orders, or those training personnel under military orders, and those made because of in-flight emergencies. USPA members must comply with the Basic Safety Requirements, protecting the best interests of both the participants and the general public.

As it reads, USPA members must comply with the BSRs regardless of geography or whether or not it is a USPA member DZ. Those USPA license and ratings holders may be in violation of the BSRs when jumping BASE rigs from aircraft, regardless of the legality of the location where the jump is being made.

Anyone have an opinion on the matter?

 

Edited January 26, 2021 by BMAC615

[nwt 131]

1 hour ago, BMAC615 said:

Since we’re on the topic of BASE from aircraft: Does USPA BSR 2-1 A.1. cover ALL jumps - even those made outside the US?

The Basic Safety Requirements apply to all jumps except those made under military orders, or those training personnel under military orders, and those made because of in-flight emergencies. USPA members must comply with the Basic Safety Requirements, protecting the best interests of both the participants and the general public.

As it reads, USPA members must comply with the BSRs regardless of geography or whether or not it is a USPA member DZ. Those USPA license and ratings holders may be in violation of the BSRs when jumping BASE rigs from aircraft, regardless of the legality of the location where the jump is being made.

Anyone have an opinion on the matter?

 

I guess the surest way to get the correct answer would be just to ask the USPA. As a private organization I think they're pretty much free to interpret their own rules however they want.

[sfzombie13 307]

49 minutes ago, nwt said:

I guess the surest way to get the correct answer would be just to ask the USPA. As a private organization I think they're pretty much free to interpret their own rules however they want.

they can but the issue is regarding legality, not breaking the bsr.  you may lose a rating but you can't get a fine if it's otherwise legal.

[BMAC615 205]

I get the legality part - was hoping a Regional Director was on this thread and could provide clarification.

[SethInMI 145]

2 hours ago, nwt said:

As it reads, USPA members must comply with the BSRs regardless of geography or whether or not it is a USPA member DZ. Those USPA license and ratings holders may be in violation of the BSRs when jumping BASE rigs from aircraft, regardless of the legality of the location where the jump is being made

Where do you get that reading? B.1 says jumps in the USA have to comply with FAA regulations, but I don't see anything in the BSRs that says if you are not in the USA, you can't jump a BASE rig from a plane.

edit: of course you are talking about container opening altitude. yeah, no idea on that.

Edited January 26, 2021 by SethInMI
duh, base openings

[sundevil777 93]

18 hours ago, mark said:

I agree with nwt.  Before the 2001 rule change, the regulation was unambiguous -- skydivers were required to use single-harness, dual-parachute systems.  Because of poor drafting, the 2001 change addressed only what a single-harness, dual-parachute system consisted of, to distinguish it from a tandem system, instead of requiring its use.

But it doesn't matter.  It's been litigated, and the commonly-held (pre-2001) position prevailed against us barracks-lawyer types (or sea-lawyers, if you prefer).  The incident was Dwain Weston, Royal Gorge Bridge, 5 October 2003.

Most people don't like ambiguity.

Lawyers require ambiguity for their profession to thrive

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

18 hours ago, mark said:

I agree with nwt.  Before the 2001 rule change, the regulation was unambiguous -- skydivers were required to use single-harness, dual-parachute systems.  Because of poor drafting, the 2001 change addressed only what a single-harness, dual-parachute system consisted of, to distinguish it from a tandem system, instead of requiring its use.

But it doesn't matter.  It's been litigated, and the commonly-held (pre-2001) position prevailed against us barracks-lawyer types (or sea-lawyers, if you prefer).  The incident was Dwain Weston, Royal Gorge Bridge, 5 October 2003.

Thank you. I knew there was a 'hook' there somewhere. 

I knew it was a legal requirement.

I couldn't remember the details. 

[sfzombie13 307]

1 hour ago, SethInMI said:

Where do you get that reading? B.1 says jumps in the USA have to comply with FAA regulations, but I don't see anything in the BSRs that says if you are not in the USA, you can't jump a BASE rig from a plane.

edit: of course you are talking about container opening altitude. yeah, no idea on that.

well if that is the case, then lots of jumpers at bridge day and perrigrine would be in danger of losing ratings.  i know a few instructors that jumped at bridge day.  are they now not instructors?

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

4 minutes ago, sfzombie13 said:

well if that is the case, then lots of jumpers at bridge day and perrigrine would be in danger of losing ratings.  i know a few instructors that jumped at bridge day.  are they now not instructors?

Nope. Not from an aircraft. 

USPA doesn't care about people jumping from fixed objects.
FAA doesn't either.

It's when the jump is from an aircraft that they become interested.

And I think that jumpers in places that have different rules would have to think about that. A BASE rig out of a plane is perfectly within it's design parameters to open well below BSR minimum pack opening altitudes. 

[SethInMI 145]

7 minutes ago, sfzombie13 said:

well if that is the case,

no, the use case is helicopter base wingsuit jumps with low-ish openings.

[kleggo 138]

On 7/31/2006 at 10:02 AM, jlmiracle said:

No, screwing up skydiving for the rest of us when some dumbass goes in under a base rig from 4000 ft from a balloon would be worse.

 

You are prescient, fast forward to the "dumbass" who bounced at Perris in 2019 when he jumped a base rig from balloon with the wrong slider configuration. Though he didn't screw up skydiving, he screwed up jumping out of balloon's with base gear from that specific balloon vendor.

On 7/31/2006 at 10:02 AM, jlmiracle said:

 

 

Be kinder than necessary because everyone you meet is fighting some kind of battle.

 

 

[kleggo 138]

Interesting reading thru this old thread.

The posts from 2006 were much more interesting than the recent additions IMO.

I wonder how many of those from 2006 are active / current / alive?

 

Craig

[BMAC615 205]

4 hours ago, SethInMI said:

Where do you get that reading? B.1 says jumps in the USA have to comply with FAA regulations, but I don't see anything in the BSRs that says if you are not in the USA, you can't jump a BASE rig from a plane.

edit: of course you are talking about container opening altitude. yeah, no idea on that.

I get that from reading USPA BSR 2-1 A.1. that states “ALL JUMPS ...” It does not state all jumps in the USA - it states ALL JUMPS.

Edited January 27, 2021 by BMAC615

[SethInMI 145]

40 minutes ago, BMAC615 said:

it states ALL JUMPS

sure. all jumps have to comply with the BSRs. but what BSR are you thinking BASE rig wearing jumpers will be violating?

the one for container opening altitude? yes I agree they will be violating that one. But there isn't a BSR that says you can't jump a BASE rig from a plane no matter where you are in the world.

[sfzombie13 307]

2 hours ago, wolfriverjoe said:

Nope. Not from an aircraft. 

USPA doesn't care about people jumping from fixed objects.
FAA doesn't either.

It's when the jump is from an aircraft that they become interested.

And I think that jumpers in places that have different rules would have to think about that. A BASE rig out of a plane is perfectly within it's design parameters to open well below BSR minimum pack opening altitudes. 

it was specifically stated the uspa DOES care about low openings and losing ratings for violating a bsr. 

[BMAC615 205]

55 minutes ago, SethInMI said:

sure. all jumps have to comply with the BSRs. but what BSR are you thinking BASE rig wearing jumpers will be violating?

the one for container opening altitude? yes I agree they will be violating that one. But there isn't a BSR that says you can't jump a BASE rig from a plane no matter where you are in the world.

Now, that’s an interesting point. A BASE jump is not a skydiving operation. BASE specifically refers to jumps from Building, Antenna, Span and Earth. Like mentioned above, the FAA does not care about a BASE jump, but, does care about skydive operations from aircraft. When jumping from an aircraft it is not a BASE jump, but, a skydiving operation.

USPA makes official recommendations for skydiving operations.

In its governing role, USPA is officially recognized by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as the representative of skydivers in the United States. USPA is an organization of skydivers, run by skydivers for skydivers, and it is your voice in skydiving. USPA keeps skydivers skydiving.

SIM defines a “skydive” as the descent of a person to the surface from an aircraft in flight when he or she uses or intends to use a parachute during all or part of that descent. From the number of times they use the word skydive and the definition of a skydive, I’d say USPA BSRs do not pertain to BASE jumps, but, do pertain to skydiving operations performed by members when jumping from an aircraft, regardless of geography, excluding military operations.

Edited January 27, 2021 by BMAC615

[sfzombie13 307]

that part makes sense, it's the ride, not the fall, that the uspa worries about, due to the faa.  the only other thing i am gonna throw out there now is the question of the waiver.  one person mentioned legal balloon base jumps for training.  another said you can't waiver the far.  which is it?  i am pretty sure almost everything is waiverable with the right paperwork and reasoning, but have been wrong before.

[SethInMI 145]

9 hours ago, BMAC615 said:

I’d say USPA BSRs do not pertain to BASE jumps, but, do pertain to skydiving operations performed by members when jumping from an aircraft, regardless of geography, excluding military operations.

I wasn't saying BSRs applied to jumps fixed objects. They don't. And yes the BSRs cover skydivers regardless of geography. But the essential point I am making is their isn't a BSR against jumping single container "BASE" rigs. There is a "abide by the FAA in the USA" BSR but only in the USA.